Closed Kinetic Chain Exercises Therapy Versus Wii-Based Exergame Therapy in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: One of the most prevalent musculoskeletal conditions that impair function and cause discomfort is osteoarthritis in the knee. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of closed kinetic chain exercises and Wii-based exergame treatment on knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients’ pain, joint range of motion, muscle strength, joint position sense, functioning, and motor performance. Methods: This study included 56 patients diagnosed with knee OA. Participants were randomly divided into 2 groups: a Wii-based exercises (WBE) group and a closed kinetic chain exercise (CKCE) group. Exercises continued 5 days a week for 3 weeks. Participants were examined before the therapy, afterward, and in the eighth week. Pain threshold, joint range of motion, muscle strength, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the Timed Up & Go test (TUG), and joint position sense were alternately examined. Results: A statistically significant difference was obtained in pain threshold results after treatment compared to before treatment (P < .05) in the intra-group comparison and at the eighth week (P < .05). After treatment, joint position sense was significantly better in the CKCE group than in the WBE group (P < .05). Statistical significance was achieved in the WOMAC values after treatment in both groups (P < .05). Intragroup comparisons revealed that the improvements in the WOMAC and TUG tests in the WBE group were statistically better than those in the CKCE group (P < .05). In the analysis of the difference between groups after treatment and at week 8, the results were significantly better in the WBE group than in the CKCE group in terms of the TUG test values (P < .05). Conclusion: We concluded that, among patients with knee OA, WBE programs can be of great use for pain reduction and for functionality and balance exercises in rehabilitation. Cite this article as: Büyükyılmaz G, Menek B, Tarakçı D. Closed kinetic chain exercises therapy versus wii-based exergame therapy in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: randomized controlled trial. Arch Health Sci Res. 2024;11(2):133-139.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".